DISCUSSIONWikipedia editors caught altering definition of “Recession” to assist Whitehouse get snarky at being called out over their blatant bias.

submitted by ClassroomPast6178 from (en.m.wikipedia.org)

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

TLDR;

Wikipedia’s page on Recession was subject to lots of editing to make it agree with the Whitehouse’s redefinition of the word. They got caught so after trying and failing to argue that they were right, they reintroduced the neutral point of view and proper definition, but not before having a bit of a passive-aggressive tantrum on the talk page.

Be interesting to see what other Wikipedia pages have been given an ideological laundering to meet the standards of the current year and keep them in agreement with The Message.

Edit: when I worked in cancer research, over a decade ago now, we did a very small scale, informal study of where patients were getting their information from, and we found that Wikipedia was, even then, the number one source. We then looked at pages relevant to the cancers we treated and used some open source tools to look at the changes over time and where the changes were being made. We found that one of the treatment equipment manufacturers (I’d tell you, but it would dox me as the field I was in was tiny) was altering the relevant disease and treatment pages to make their products stand out and rival products suddenly gained side-effects (often completely false). It was a concerted effort to advertise direct to patients in markets where that is prohibited (iirc only the US and New Zealand allow it). Anyone that claims that Wikipedia and editor bias doesn’t matter is either an ostrich with their head in the sand or trying to cover some shit up.

[–]AkbarZip 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Wikipedia editor here, there are actually rules against that kind of stuff, you can get banned if you don't disclose upfront that you're being paid to edit on someone else's behalf and they find out.

[–]DirewolfGhost 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Ah yes, the "gun free zone" strategy.

[–]GammaKingPreferred pronouns: "My Liege" or "Your Majesty". 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Wikipedia's issue is that the application of the rules entirely depends on whether someone else investigates and reports it. Since most editors are expressly partisan objections are only ever raised when it runs against the desired narrative. A DNC employee can quite happily edit pages on Republicans to introduce bias and nobody will bat an eye.

In a similar vein, any newer editor who pushes against the mob is accused of being an "SPA", which in turn is used to justify harsher bans from enforcement of already convoluted policies. This actively pushes them away from editing and maintains the clique-like community.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Wikipedia vandal here. Good luck with that. How would you hope to prove that?

[–]AkbarZip 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's no airtight way to completely stop it. However when evidence arises they take action.

[–]raven9 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

wikipedia started as the encyclopedia by the people, for the people but it has been hijacked by the same establishment kikes that control the mainstream media. They shut ordinary users out by making the editing process increasingly more complicated to the point you now almost need a college degree in wikipedia editing to do it and yes in Israel they have wikipedia editing school.

[–]makesyoudownvote 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I mean, I know the different demographic here, but still I feel like your comment would carry a lot more weight without the word "kike" in it.

Especially since Jewish Americans have started drifting right over the past 20 years since 9/11.

[–]Danimal4NU 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Wiki is an utter joke when it comes to anything political that their "editors" care enough about to change.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

This was never controversial or even questioned before now.

"Recession" is not just some subjective synonym for "bad economy." Words have meaning.

[–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It was like the redefinition of “sexual preferences” in Merriam-Webster to fit some gotcha sound bite moment, except this time they didn’t get away with it.